The degree of ignorance exhibited by some of our elected representatives can be truly appalling, particularly when it comes to U.S. history.
One of the current projects of politicians from the Left has been the restriction of the rights of law-abiding citizens to own guns, in violation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
Twisting and fabricating interpretations never meant by the Founders is a necessity for the success of that project.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, is just the latest mouthpiece for taking away Americans’ rights. On Monday, he was discussing the movement among states to declare unconstitutional federal gun laws null and void, drawing unwarranted comparisons to the Civil War and thus, in his mind, to slavery.
Then he added, “I think history will look back on this round of nullification as kindly as it did on the last round. It is laughable also because it is a total bastardization of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right. It has always had conditions upon it like the First Amendment has.
“The idea that the Second Amendment was put in there in order to allow citizens to fight their government is insane. If that was the case, we wouldn’t have also included treason in the United States constitution. … The Second Amendment is not designed to allow the citizenry to arm itself against the government, and nullification is another example of states not understanding the true nature of that amendment.”
But the senator is projecting his own confusion. The bedrock principle of America has always been that rights come from God: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights …” etc. For liberals, here’s a quick recap: Rights are granted by God to individuals, individuals grant authority to their government, government’s job is to preserve individual rights.
The current government has a vested interest in making you believe the opposite is true, that government grants you rights, that you must obey government, and God takes a back seat, never to appear in public. But if rights don’t come from God, then they aren’t “rights,” they’re just political favors.
As for the assertion that the Second Amendment was not put in the Constitution to allow citizens to take up arms against their government, the senator should acquaint himself with the Federalist Papers, No. 29, which addresses the idea of a “militia,” composed of all capable citizens, as called for in the Second Amendment.
In the essay, Alexander Hamilton wrote that to have every citizen trained to the level necessary for top military performance would be a prohibitive drag on the economy, so he encouraged the training of a core militia leadership that would be just as competent as any professional army but dedicated to protecting their home states and communities.
“… If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist,” Hamilton wrote.
In other words, the militia was meant not only to defend the country in time of need but also if necessary to be exactly what Murphy calls “insane,” a force to oppose the federal government.
Murphy also argues that the Second Amendment has conditions upon it, but the federal government the conditions are imposed upon:
“Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.”
When was the last time you were called to assemble with your local militia? When was the last time the government checked to make sure you were properly armed (as opposed to disarmed)? In Colonial times, local governments had public armories and would provide men with guns and gunpowder if they were too poor to arm themselves. When was the last time your government loaned you a rifle?
People like Murphy don’t have any logical reasons for limiting guns or ammunition, a fact which Hamilton recognized among opponents of the Second Amendment in his day when he wrote, “There is something so far-fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to liberty from the militia, that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or with raillery. … Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests?”
Irrational fear is the ruler of our modern day, and those under its influence are more than willing to throw out our God-given rights to make themselves feel less frightened.
That is just one of many dangers gun owners may have to defend against.